sign in sign up
<<
Home , Multiculturalism

e-ISSN : 2620 3502 International Journal on Integrated Education p-ISSN : 2615 3785 ideology: cultural festivals and fusion of diverse socio-ethnic construct, interest and ethnic cooperation

DR. Aham Ikwumezie Department of Economics Imo University Owerri

PROF. Cosmas C. Alugbuo Department of Management Imo State University Owerri

DR. (MRS.) Chigozie Ugochukwu Okoro Department of Hospitality and Tourism Imo State University Owerri

DR. Polycap Igbojiekwe Department of Hospitality and Tourism Imo State University Owerri

ABSTRACT Cultural festivals as celebrated in Nigeria have enormous potential to drive fusion of diverse socio-ethnic construct. Our study focused on only three psychometric rationales or premise for evaluating common preference in cultural mixes. Fundamentally each in Nigeria feels strong about the uniqueness of their . Distinct cultural traditions have been preserved and appreciated over history. We synthesized this construct at α = 0.05. Among others, key factors of multiculturalism (r = 0.39) (ideological condition that believe tradition must not be altered or acculturated) such as cuisines, costumes, rituals, languages did not significantly encourage fusion of socio-ethnic groups. Furthermore, among others, key factors of colorblindness (r = 0.52) (ideological condition that believe that culture has common origin “human beings” and common goals “satisfy human’s needs and desires”; and so people everywhere can bridge cultural differentia) such as local business, heritage site, Lifestyle, security correlates. However, lifestyle and security mediates in certain domains of cultural consumption that evokes fear of cultural mixing and which does not absolutely change ethnic predominant cultural mindset. Key factors of (r = 0.79) (ideological condition with the believe that traditions and perspectives influence each other as cultural groups continually make contact and interact) such as awareness, values, friendliness and markets appeared significant in driving fusion. Multiculturalism (p < 0.05) offers high propensity to increasing preference for cultural fusion options through increasing concerns about the impurity from the mixing elements of different socio-ethnic group. Key Words: Cultural Festival, Ideological Conditions and Socio-ethnic Fusion

1. INTRODUCTION 1.1 Background of the study: Cultural festivals have been an important aspect of . In recent times, the cultural festivals are implemented with characteristic embodiment of increasing social ; even though there are evidences of elaborate ethnic identification in their consumption. Individual differences in the strength of ethnic identification lead to differences in the strength of social bias, and to differences in the evaluation of inter-ethnic construct, interest and cooperation. Ethnic constructs are constituted in the fundamental ethnic . They do not only define acceptable beliefs and identity but provide understanding of traditional narratives of values (Hideg and Ferris, 2016). Peoples’ beliefs and practices regarding diversity play very critical role in inter-ethnic interactions during cultural festivals. (Martin and Phillips, 2017) Ethnic cultural interest is dynamic. They represent the traditional psychology that shapes the cultural context for collective choice of approach to contain challenge or take advantage of opportunity (Joshi, 2014). Ethnic interest reflects adaptation of attitude, cognition and bahaviour that reduces the capacity of people to think of themselves as individual actors with personal agendas (Pasek, Stark, Krosnick, Tompson & Payne, 2014). Ethnic cultural cooperation explains the spread over a territory with varying cultural paraphernalia and overt institutionalized behaviour that reduces differences in cultural orientation of the individual regions. Ethnic cultural cooperation tends to replace intrinsic cultural tenets with acceptable social bias. It represents the extent to which the social bias emanating from the cooperating ethnic groups has been incorporated into the sense of self, and at the same time, that the self is experienced as an integral part of the cooperating ethnic group. By implication, individuals who strongly identify with the cooperating ethnic groups, are more likely to behave in a fashion consistent with that group’s norms than are weak identifiers. Despite the uniqueness of individual culture in Nigeria, cultural festivals attract enormous local and international tourist attention. They tend to fuse individuals from diverse ethnic group and project a seeming

Volume 3, Issue XII, December 2020 | 76

e-ISSN : 2620 3502 International Journal on Integrated Education p-ISSN : 2615 3785

commitment to acting on behalf of the fused group. Nonetheless, there is still considerable variability in how people translate fusion to the group into their behavior. Individuals, with unchanged values and ideas, often pursue different patterns of life and institutionalize different forms of behaviour when faced with the different opportunities offered in different cultural festival environments. This showcase the argument for obvious overlap of retained salient personal self (personal identity) and associated feelings of personal society (social identity) in any festival interactions. It also suggest a high incidence of individual own beliefs around how to approach group differences in any cultural mix in Nigeria. This is a major challenge to the potential of cultural festivals in promoting fusion of the diverse ethnic group. There is the problem of not knowing which explicitly summarized practices that would communicate approaches to and norms around diversity. Given the above challenges and gaps this study therefore focuses on providing empirical evidence to diversity ideology that could lead individuals in Nigeria to either accept or to reject emerging cultural mixes. The main objective of this research is to measure the extent to which cultural festivals drive fusion of diverse socio- ethnic construct, interest and ethnic cooperation. By implication we want to find out which diversity ideology would ride on the back of cultural festivals to achieve fusion of diverse socio-ethnic construct, interest and ethnic cooperation in Nigeria. The study would provide answer to the following research questions a. What are the diversity ideologies? b. To what extent can they explain cultural festivals in term of inter-ethnic relation and cultural equilibrium? c. To what extent are they supported by characteristic features of cultural festivals or tourist beliefs? d. To what degree are their comparative consequences on regional tourism competitiveness? On the strength of these research questions, the study would want to examine diversity ideologies (i.e. colorblindness, multiculturalism and polyculturalism) to know which amongst them show high tendency to promote inclusion of diverse ethnic construct, interest and ethnic cooperation through consumption behavior of cultural festivals in Nigeria. The research methodology consists of up-to-date survey based analysis of cultural festivals in each of the geo- political zones of Nigeria; and modeling of cultural tourism economics in overall GDP. The model is based on macro realities of socio-ethnic diversity, livelihood, institutions and mobility of economic activities as practiced in the various localities of these fiestas. We employed Cronbach’sAlpha Coefficient to validate the data reliability. We conducted a factor analysis using a varimax rotation on all diversity ideology items. We used correction and multiple regression statistics to measure the influence and the direction of interaction and the 3-way ANOVA statistics to make feasible decision on our findings. Statistical summary of all variables was prepared using standard statistical software: Special package for social sciences (SPSS). The research details are given in the sections below.

2.0 LITERATURE REVIEW Diversity ideology is the aspect of that focuses on enhancing the understanding of intergroup bias. Thus understanding the concept of diversity ideologies is critical to gaining deeper understanding of intergroup interactions. It interprets the impact of characteristic variables on intergroup relations and a deeper insight on reducing intergroup conflict and inequality (Apfelbaum, Stephens and Reagans, 2016). In the social group context, diversity ideology have often been used to conceptualized and evaluate the dichotomy between social group differences. Depending on different intentions behind the interaction such as assimilation vs. inclusion (Hahn, Banchefsky, Park and Judd, 2015) and differences in the focus of attention such as sameness vs. de-emphasis of subgroup differences in favor of individual uniqueness (Rosenthal and Levy, 2010) diversity ideology, though complex and can take different forms, provides explanation to how contextual or in-group variables (beliefs) are adopted by individual members (Bourguignon, 2017; Martin and Phillips, 2017), and how individual level variables (beliefs) in turn can shape in-group . Analysis of these differences in social group dynamics could result to de-emphasizing or acknowledging and celebrating or improving on certain characteristic or behavioural variables (Hahn et al., 2015), In the cultural tourism sphere, diversity ideologies refer to cultural practices that explicitly communicate predominating idea, approaches and norms in any given cultural mix. It refers to individual’s own belief around how to approach ethnic differences in cultural mix situation (Martin and Phillips, 2017). Diversity ideologies, practices or beliefs are highly consequential and offer a complementary way to uncovering the dynamics around and outcomes (Rattan and Ambady, 2013) of multiethnic contact in cultural festival. The role of cultural festival influence and individual beliefs around how to approach diversity in the quality of intergroup relations can be explained in three broad types of diversity ideologies (Dovidio, Gaertner, & Saguy, 2009; Sasaki and Vorauer, 2013). Although these diversity ideologies, differ in the way and extent to which they recognize or ignore differences between demographic groups, however they ultimately contribute to an environment in which diverse groups of people can harmoniously live and work together (Plaut, Thomas, Hurd and Romano, 2018). It then seems pertinent to conclude that people's responses to culturally mixed experiences may hinge upon their assumptions about the nature of cultural differences – or diversity ideologies (Rattan & Ambady, 2013; Thomas, Plaut, & Tran, 2014). By implication, diversity ideologies provide a vision of positive intergroup relations and a foundation for intergroup equality (Ryan, Casas, & Thompson, 2010). The colorblind ideology argues that equality among groups is best gained by downplaying group distinctions and treating people as unique individuals (Rosenthal & Levy, 2010; Peery, 2011; Apfelbaum, Norton, & Sommers, 2012). The ideology assumes that categorizing individuals by their social group leads to and conflict; but that

Volume 3, Issue XII, December 2020 | 77

e-ISSN : 2620 3502 International Journal on Integrated Education p-ISSN : 2615 3785

these negative consequences could be reduced by ignoring social group categories. Critics of colorblindness believes that it is possible to suppressing social categories as humans have a natural tendency to categorize their environment to be able to process the large amount of information (Fryberg and Stephens, 2010; Morris, Chiu, & Liu, 2015). They further argue that since diversity offer positive contributions to companies and the society as a whole (Bernardo, 2013); differences between demographic groups should not be ignored but recognized and celebrated. The core ideals of multiculturalism is that group memberships must be acknowledged, valued and celebrated in order to attain equality and diversity (Stevens, Plaut, & Sanchez-Burks, 2008; Plaut, 2010; Rosenthal & Levy, 2010). Invariably it presupposes that diversity should be emphasized rather than ignored (i.e., awareness). In this view, differences between social groups do not have to be harmful (Chernev & Gal, 2010; Costa-Lopes, Pereira and Judd, 2014). When differences between demographic groups are perceived in a positive manner or perceived as sources to learn from; they do not evoke prejudice as members would always consider demographic group differences meaningful and important. Thus ignoring or undervaluing demographic group differences would be a disservice (Bernardo, 2013). Critics of this ideology argue that emphasizing differences between groups can exacerbate , create divisions between groups, delegitimize racial inequity claims, and promote (Hahn, Judd and Park, 2010; Hahn et al., 2015; Gündemir and Galinsky, 2018). Multiculturalism may strengthen people's defensive reactions when other cultures are involved (Rosenthal & Levy, 2013). Rather than understanding cultures as separate independent traditions to be preserved polyculturalism celebrates cultures in the understanding that they are systems that define themselves through interacting with each other and that regenerate themselves through (Rosenthal & Levy, 2010; Morris et al., 2015). Polyculturalism correlates with higher willingness to engage in intergroup contact (Rosenthal & Levy, 2012). It is associated with eagerness to make friends outside of one's own cultural group (Bernardo, Rosenthal, & Levy, 2013); embracing immigrants (Rosenthal, Levy, Katser, & Bazile, 2015); reduces fear of interacting with foreign cultures in activities (Cho, Morris, & Dow, 2016) associated with openness to changing traditions (Rosenthal, Levy, & Militano, 2014; Rosenthal, Levy, &Moss, 2012). The underlying assumption in polyculturalism is the view that interaction is inherent to cultures; cultural purity and contamination as a result of cultural mixing is not considered a serious concern. 2.1 Empirical Review Evaluating the impact of interethnic ideologies on the likability of stereotypic and counter-stereotypic minority targets Gutierrez and Unzueta (2010) found that multicultural ideology condition favored counter-stereotypic target more than the stereotypic target while colorblind condition liked stereotypic target more than the counter-stereotypic target. They reasoned that ideology confirmation affects the likability of targets based on their stereo-typicality (Morrison, Plaut, & Ybarra, 2010). Examining the role of culture in decision- making (Pederson, Paradies, & Barndon, 2015) and especially bicultural person's decision making (Mok & Morris, 2013); it was found that cultural blending forms part of culture consumption experience and people's ideologies about culture come into play. As implied in these studies cultures is as well a source of preferences as it is an attribute of the product or experiences that tourists evaluate and choose.

3.0 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY Data on diversity ideology and attributes of the different cultural festivals over a six months period as well as for modeling of cultural tourism economics in overall GDP, was done using cross sectional survey design. The test scope include the Igue cultural festival in Benin Edo State during 1st to 14th December period, the Calabar Carnival celebrated during November/December period, the Riye Gateway Musical festival in Abeokuta Ogun State during 16th to 18th December period, the Ofala Festival in Anambra/Enugu during December period, the Arugungun Fishing Festival in Kebbi State during February/March period, and the Kwagh-Hir Masquerade festival in Tiv Land Benue State during 26th December to 1st January period. Actual number of questionnaires produced and distributed was 10,080 (1,680 in each of the six states). However a total of 9,984 questionnaires were duly collated for subsequent analysis (average of 1,664 questionnaires in each of the six states and 416 copies collated by each of the 4 field assistants). The questionnaire construct was tailored specifically to (1) the tourists, (2) the local entrepreneur and (3) the State/government officials/Expert opinions audience/groups (average of 554 questionnaires for each audience group in each of the six states). Data from these groups did not only provide concise knowledge about consumption behaviour in a cultural mix; but suggest acceptability of colorblindness or multicultutalism or polyculturalism or any of their combination in driving fusion of diverse ethnic construct, interest and ethnic cooperation leveraging cultural festivals in Nigeria. 3.1 Data Analysis 3.1.1 The Cronbach’s Alpha Co-efficient: - Cronbach's alpha is a coefficient of reliability or consistency (Ritter, 2010). It assumes that the average correlation of a set of items is an accurate estimate of the average correlation of all items that pertain to a certain construct (Eisinga, et al., 2013). It is computed as per following formula: Rii = (ΣW)/A*N …….3.2 Where W is overall weight of factor; a = constant expressing the weight assigned to each responses (ranges from 0 for No happen to 4 for Always i.e. in this case A = Highest score (4)), n = frequency of each response, N = total number of responses.

Spearman’s and Pearson’s Rank Correlation

Volume 3, Issue XII, December 2020 | 78

e-ISSN : 2620 3502 International Journal on Integrated Education p-ISSN : 2615 3785

Spearman’s rank correlation coefficient measures the strength and directions of the relationship between two quantitative variables. It ranges from -1 (perfect negative correlation) to +1 (perfect positive correlation). It is calculated using the following formula: r's = 1 – [ ( 6 ∑ d²)/(n³ - n)] …….3.3 Where r is the Spearman’s rank correlation coefficient between two parties, d is the difference between ranks assigned to variables for each cause, and n is the number of pairs of rank. The Pearson’s differ in the sense that it measures the correlation between populations of varying characteristics and it is calculated using the formula: r = nΣxy –(Σx)(Σy) ………. 3.4 √{nΣx2 – (Σx)²} {nΣy2 – (Σy)²

Correlation is a measure of how two random variables X and Y “move” with respect to each other. 3.1.3 F-Test for Level of Significance The F-Test was employed to test the level of significance of all the independent variables. The ANOVA was used to ascertain test of significance. This test establishes whether or not a significant relationship exists between the dependent variable (Y) and the independent variables (X1, X2, X3…Xn). Ho is accepted at a level of significance, if F* < F1 - a (n-k-1),

otherwise reject Ho and accept HA. Source of Variation Sum of D,f M,s F - ratio square Between groups SSB k-1 MSB = (SSB)/(k-1) MSB/MSE Between groups SSE n-k MSE = (SSE)/(n-k) total SST N-1 - -

Decision Rule Accept the null hypothesis if the critical tabulated is greater than the calculated value, otherwise reject. The rejection of the null hypothesis means the automatic of the alternative hypothesis. The research hypothesis is HO: Cultural festivals cannot drive fusion of diverse socio-ethnic construct, interest and ethnic co-operation HA: Cultural festivals cannot drive fusion of diverse socio-ethnic construct, interest and ethnic co-operation We model these ideological conditions focusing on interest; ethnic construct; ethnic co-operation. Cronbach’s alpha = .929, measured on a five point Likert Scale showed that the data was highly reliable. In order to look at the effect of colorblindness, multiculturalism, and polyculturalism, a mixed-model analysis of variance (ANOVA) was conducted with repeated measures on the first three factors. There was a main effect of interest F (1, 464) = 4167.72, p < .001, such that the interest ratings (M = 48.63, SE = 2.01) were higher than the non-interest ratings (M = 18.06, SE = .89). There was also a significant main effect for construct, F (1,464) = 9386.44, p < .001, showing that construct choice (M = 94.58, SE = .99) were strongly rated than less choice for construct (M = 32.04, SE = .49). Again the effect of cooperation F(1, 464) = 6129.42, p < .001, such that the desire for cooperation (M = 98.91, SE = 2.06) were higher than the decline from cooperation (M = 28.02, SE = .81). In order to investigate this interaction, two 3-way ANOVA i.e. (Colorblindness, Multiculturalism, Polyculturalism) x (Interest, Construct, Cooperation) interactions were conducted, one for the dependent effect and one for independent effect. The interaction for dependence was not significant, F(2, 464) = .41, p = ns. The 3-way interaction for the independent effect was marginally significant, F(2, 464) = 1.99, p = .069. Simple main effects analyses showed that the interest was not quite different between the polyculturalism (M = 89.24, SE = 3.27), colorblindness (M = 89.20, SE = 3.31), and multiculturalism (M = 89.19, SE = 3.29). Construct F(2,464) = 1.21, p = not significant for the colorblindness/polyculturalism; but significant p < 0.001 for multiculturalism. Cooperation was not quite different between the polyculturalism (M = 68.14, SE = 2.16) and colorblindness (M = 68.20, SE = 2.19), but higher than the rating for multiculturalism (M = 19.08, SE = 0.21) We then conduct a factor analysis using a varimax rotation on all diversity ideology items. The correlation between the items and the factor analysis are strong and relate each item to its intended diversity ideology (i.e. factor loading exceed 0.60). There was no incidence of multi-collinearity i.e. all variance inflation factors (VIF) were less than the standard cut-off of 10. Table 1; The descriptive statistics and correlations among the study variables.

Variables Mean SD 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 15.62 Age 43.9 Colourblindness 0.78 -0.04 3.74 1.81 0.09 0.04* Multiculturalism 4.36 Polyculturalism 0.94 -0.07 0.54 0.01* 5.15 1.88 0.08 0.49 0.03* 0.05 Ethnic construct 4.32 0.99 0.09 0.08 0.48 0.09 Interest 2.63 0.41

Volume 3, Issue XII, December 2020 | 79

e-ISSN : 2620 3502 International Journal on Integrated Education p-ISSN : 2615 3785

Cooperation 2.87 0.94 0.09 0.02 0.58 0.09 0.52 0.09 Choice 1.72 0.69 0.09 -0.12 -0.05 0.58 -0.49 0.07 0.02 Note: N = 10080 p* < 0.05 p** < 0.01

The table showed a more filtered correlation. Multiculturalism (0.04*) and polyculturalism (0.01*) were both significant at p < 0.05. They more incident association that tend towards promoting sustained ethnic-construct, than interest and co-operation. Table 2. Linear regression analysis on culturally mixed choice Variables 1 2 3 Constant 1.98 2.30 2.54 Colourblindness 0.06 0.05 Multiculturalism 0.03* 0.02* Polyculturalism 0.06 0.01* Ethnic construct 0.01* 0.31 0.28 Interest 0.00 0.56 0.09 Cooperation 0.02 0.32 -0.29 F 2.34* 2.38* 2.36* R² 0.10 0.08 0.12 Adjusted R² 0.06 0.02 0.09 ∆R² 0.20* 0.05* 0.20* N = 1080; Unstandardized regression coefficient are displayed *p < 0.05

Multiculturalism ideological conditions tend to be significant at p < 0.05 (0.02) in the Nigeria context with tenacity towards ethnic constructs (Table 2).

Table 3 Logistic regression analysis on culturally mixed choice Variale b SE Wald Exp(β) Colourblindness -0.62 -0.19 0.18 1.76 Multiculturalism 0.38* -0.24 5.82 0.98 Polyculturalism 0.61 -0.22 0.99 1.93 Ethnic construct -0.21 -0.13 1.11 0.82 Interest 6.91 -0.10 -0.06 0.89 Cooperation -0.1 -0.01 -0.09 1.05 Constant -0.14 -0.10

Model X² 8.24

Given the Wald statistic of 5.82 (Table 3), multiculturalism is therefore the most dominant ideological condition in Nigeria. We do not therefore reject the null hypothesis (HO). We take decision that cultural festivals do not drive fusion of interest, socio-ethnic construct and ethnic cooperation. HO: ≥ 0 DISCUSSION In summary, multiculturalism has very significant effect on cultural mixes choice and socio-ethnic boundary condition in Nigeria. It is possible that the influence of multiculturalism on choice of cultural mixing as a function of a more complex ethnocentric motivational state that results from thinking about cultures as systems that evolve, re-generate and which must be sustained from within but not with interactions among other cultures. There is low identification with

Volume 3, Issue XII, December 2020 | 80

e-ISSN : 2620 3502 International Journal on Integrated Education p-ISSN : 2615 3785

sub-regional cultures among citizen within the of Nigeria. While this outcome seems to stimulate elevated need for closure; other domains of cultural consumption might be more prone to evoke predominant cultural mindset and thus mediate for more purification of Nigeria cultures encompassed in cultural festivals. On the basis of socio-ethnic construct, interest and ethnic co-operation multiculturalism has very significant effect on cultural mixes choice and socio-ethnic boundary condition in Nigeria. By implication it will be feasibly difficult to achieve regional or socio-ethnic fusion on the premise of socio-ethnic construct, interest and ethnic co-operation encompassing most cultural festivals. We found out that socio-ethnic cultures are constantly decomposing changes in regional growth by two effects of the shift-share analysis. The first is the culture-mix effect which is the share of regional growth that is due to the cultural attractions of the regions and it determines whether a region has an expanding or contracting cultural economy. The regional effect which is the difference between the regional growth and growth that would have occurred in the region if its were proportionally distributed across regions is the second. These two effects emanate from the thinking that cultures are systems that evolve, re-generate and therefore must be sustained from within but not with interactions among other cultures. This thought pattern, process the choice for cultural mixing as a function of more complex ethnocentric motivational state that requires elevated need for closure. 5.0 CONCLUSION Underlying the reasons for diversity ideologies is the different effects ethnic based recognition and appreciation has on different ethnic group in the cultural or social interaction. It helps to define ethnic group needs by making inter-ethnic conversations about ethnic disparities less ambiguous. The main goal of this approach is to direct attention towards improving intergroup interactions; reducing bias; and increase chances of inter-group mutual respect. Our research showed greater endorsement for multiculturalism as the ideologies for inter-ethnic relations. There is a seeming consensus that holding strong on inherent belief in individual culture practices (multicultural ideology) to stimulates more positive expressions toward other ethnic members; increases the chances of recognizing bias when it occurs and impair prejudice. The signals are high about how comfortable ethnic members feel within, and how much they elicit in any given environment. Generally, the role of diversity ideology leveraging cultural festivals in Nigeria reveal potentially different conclusions about the relationship between ethnic constructs, interest and cooperation. 5.1 Recommendation Within the cultural context of Nigeria, we found that the domain of intergroup interactions triggers a lot of diversionary motives that influence the content and structure of the interaction. One of the reasons is that individuals hold within their natural confined more than one inherent attribute of the ideologies based on marriage. Individual difference and the type of diversity ideology that predominate their culture and interests can shape the ways in which the meaning of these ideologies is interpreted. It is therefore important to understand the different contexts of inter- group association and the possible shifts in ideology. The broad cultural context of Nigeria makes it very important for more studies that help to clearly delineate exactly what Nigeria common diversity ideology preference could be based on other variable other than the ones studied here; and how the outcome could impact positively on the beliefs of other intergroup outcomes. .

REFERENCES

1. Apfelbaum, E. P., Norton, M. I., & Sommers, S. R. (2012). Racial colorblindness: Emergence, practice, and implications. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 21, 205–209. 2. Apfelbaum, E. P., Stephens, N. M., and Reagans, R. E. (2016). Beyond one-sizefits-all:Tailoring diversity approaches to social groups. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 111,547–566. doi: 10.1037/pspi0000071 3. Bernardo, A. B. I. (2013). Exploring social cognitive dimensions of sexual prejudice in . Philippine Journal of Psychology, 46, 19–48. 4. Bernardo, A. B., Rosenthal, L., & Levy, S. R. (2013). Polyculturalism and attitudes towards people from other countries. International Journal of , 37(3), 335–344. 5. Bourguignon, D. (2017). Diversity Policies, Prejudice, andWell-Being of Employees in Organizations. Paper presented at the Diversity in Organizations Conference at Solvay Business School, (Brussels). 6. Chernev, A., & Gal, D. (2010). Categorization effects in value judgments: Averaging bias in evaluating combinations of vices and virtues. Journal of Marketing Research, 47(4), 738–747. 7. Cho, J., Morris, M. W., & Dow, B. (2016). How Romans feel about visitors’ doing ‘as Romans do’: Diversity ideologies and trust in evaluations of cultural accommodation. Manuscript submitted for publication. 8. Costa-Lopes, R., Pereira, C. R., and Judd, C.M. (2014). Categorisation salience and in-group bias: The buffering role of a multicultural ideology. Int. J. Psychol. 49, 508–512. doi: 10.1002/ijop.12044 9. Dovidio, J. F., Gaertner, S. L., & Saguy, T. (2009). Commonality and the complexity of “we”: Social attitudes and social change. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 13, 3–20. 10. Fryberg, S. A., and Stephens, N. M. (2010). When the world is colorblind, American Indians are invisible. Psychol. Inquiry 21, 115–119. doi: 10.1080/1047840X.2010.483847

Volume 3, Issue XII, December 2020 | 81

e-ISSN : 2620 3502 International Journal on Integrated Education p-ISSN : 2615 3785

11. Gündemir, S., and Galinsky, A. D. (2018). Multicolored blindfolds: how organizational multiculturalism can conceal racial and delegitimize claims. Soc. Psychol. Pers. Sci. 9, 825– 834. doi: 10.1177/1948550617726830 12. Gutierrez, A. S., & Unzueta, M. M. (2010). The effect of interethnic ideologies of the likability of stereotypic vs. counterstereotypic minority targets. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 46, 775–784. 13. Hahn, A., Banchefsky, S., Park, B., and Judd, C. M. (2015). Measuring intergroup ideologies: positive and negative aspects of emphasizing versus looking beyond group differences. Pers. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 41, 1646– 1664. doi: 10.1177/0146167215607351 14. Hahn, A., Judd, C. M., and Park, B. (2010). Thinking about group differences: ideologies and national identities. Psychol. Inquiry 21, 120–126. doi: 10.1080/1047840X.2010.483997 15. Hideg, I., and Ferris, D. L. (2016). The compassionate sexist? How benevolent sexismpromotes and undermines gender equality in the workplace. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 111, 706–727. doi: 10.1037/pspi0000072 16. Joshi, Y. (2014). The trouble with inclusion. Virginia J. Soc. Policy Law. 21, 207–265. 17. Martin, A. E., and Phillips, K. W. (2017). What “blindness” to gender differences helps women see and do: Implications for confidence, agency, and action in male-dominated environments. Organ. Behav. Hum. Dec. Proc. 142, 28–44. doi: 10.1016/j.obhdp.2017.07.004 18. Mok, A., & Morris, M. W. (2013). Bicultural self-defense in consumer contexts: Self-protection motives are the basis for contrast versus assimilation to cultural cues. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 23(2), 175–188. 19. Morris, M. W., Chiu, C. Y., & Liu, Z. (2015). Polycultural psychology. Annual Review of Psychology, 66, 631–659. 20. Morrison, K., Plaut, V. C., & Ybarra, O. (2010). Predicting whether multiculturalism positively or negatively influences White ’ intergroup attitudes: The role of ethnic identification. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 36, 1648–1661. 21. Pasek, J., Stark, T. H., Krosnick, J. A., Tompson, T., & Payne, B. K. (2014). Attitudes Toward Blacks in the Obama Era Changing Distributions and Impacts On Job Approval And Electoral Choice, 2008–2012. Public Opinion Quarterly, 78(S1), 276-302. 22. Pederson, A., Paradies, Y., & Barndon, A. (2015). The consequences of intergroup ideologies and prejudice for discrimination and harmony. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 45, 684–696. 23. Peery, D. (2011). The colorblind ideal in a race-conscious reality: The case for a new legal ideal for race relations. Northwestern Journal of Law and Social Policy, 6, 475–495. 24. Plaut, V. C. (2010). Diversity science: Why and how difference makes a difference. Psychological Inquiry, 21, 77–99. 25. Plaut, V. C., Thomas, K. M., Hurd, K., and Romano, C. A. (2018). Do color blindness and multiculturalism remedy or foster discrimination and ?. Curr. Dir. Psychol. Sci. 27, 200–206. doi: 10.1177/0963721418766068 26. Rattan, A., and Ambady, N. (2013). Diversity ideologies and intergroup relations: an examination of colorblindness and multiculturalism. Eur. J. Soc. Psychol. 43, 12–21. doi: 10.1002/ejsp.1892 27. Rosenthal, L., & Levy, S. R. (2010). The colorblind, multicultural, and polycultural ideological approaches to improving intergroup attitudes and relations. Social Issues and Policy Review, 4, 215–246. 28. Rosenthal, L., and Levy, S. R. (2012). The relation between polyculturalism and inter-group attitudes among racially and ethnically diverse adults. Cult. Divers. Ethnic Minor. Psychol. 18, 1–16. doi: 10.1037/a0026490 29. Rosenthal, L., & Levy, S. R. (2013). Thinking about mutual influences and connections across cultures relates to more positive intergroup attitudes: An examination of polyculturalism. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 7, 547–558. 30. Rosenthal, L., Levy, S. R., Katser, M., & Bazile, C. (2015). Polyculturalism and attitudes toward Muslim Americans. Peace and Conflict: Journal of Peace Psychology, 21, 535–545. 31. Rosenthal, L., Levy, S. R., and Militano, M. (2014). Polyculturalism and sexist attitudes: Believing cultures are dynamic relates to lower . Psychol.Wom. Q. 38, 519–534. doi: 10.1177/0361684313510152 32. Rosenthal, L., Levy, S. R., & Moss, I. (2012). Polyculturalism and openness about criticizing one's culture: Implications for sexual prejudice. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 15, 149–166. 33. Ryan, C. S., Casas, J. F., & Thompson, B. K. (2010). Interethnic ideology, intergroup perceptions, and cultural orientation. Journal of Social Issues, 66, 29–44. 34. Sasaki, S. J., and Vorauer, J. D. (2013). Ignoring versus exploring differences between groups: Effects of salient color-blindness and multiculturalism on intergroup attitudes and behavior. Soc. Pers. Psychol. Compass. 7, 246–259. doi: 10.1111/spc3.12021 35. Stevens, F. G., Plaut, V. C., & Sanchez-Burks, J. (2008). Unlocking the benefits of diversity: All-inclusive multiculturalism and positive organizational change. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 44, 116–133. 36. Thomas, K.M., Plaut, V. C., & Tran, N.M. (Eds.). (2014). Diversity ideologies in organizations. Routledge.

Volume 3, Issue XII, December 2020 | 82